Hastings board reviews preliminary $59M spending plan; administration says it fits under tax cap amid rising insurance, transportation and special‑education out

District leaders presented the first of three detailed budget briefings for the 2024–25 school year on March 5, laying out priorities and the major cost drivers that shaped a preliminary spending plan.

“The tax cap considerations are very, very significant,” said Bill, the superintendent. “We are very pleased to bring you a budget within the tax cap.” He and the finance team emphasized the district’s goal to maintain core programs, preserve class size goals and fund professional learning while managing rising fixed costs.

Administration said the proposed budget‑to‑budget change is roughly 3.53 percent and described the recommended spending plan as about $59 million, with a spending plan baseline near $57 million. That gap is to be made up through a combination of property tax levy growth, use of reserves and revenue assumptions. Presenters noted the district has found efficiency measures that reduce the need for larger tax increases but cautioned that recent state proposals — including changes to a longstanding “hold harmless” in foundation aid — could reduce expected aid going forward.

Finance staff identified several high‑cost drivers: employee salaries and benefits (about 80 percent of spending), a projected double‑digit rise in health insurance costs (presented as roughly an 11 percent budget‑to‑budget increase), and pension/retirement rate volatility. Transportation costs also rose after a contract rebid last year; presenters said the district’s bus contract increased substantially and bus monitoring and additional routes drove a noticeable part of the non‑instructional budget increase.

The administration said some positions funded with temporary federal COVID dollars or one‑time fund increases have been rolled into the operating budget, increasing recurring costs. Staff also recommended modest programmatic investments — for example, small increases in special‑education staffing at the middle school — while seeking efficiency through retirements and realignments in custodial, clerical and other positions.

On the music program, the district described a recommended 0.6 full‑time equivalent reduction that administrators said would not reduce core course offerings because of creative scheduling and reassignments. "We can maintain the full fidelity of all of our music offerings," a district official said, describing a schedule that redistributes responsibilities among existing staff.

Administrators stressed the budget will be refined in upcoming sessions, and that the board will receive line‑by‑line detail before adoption. The board also discussed public outreach plans, including a PTSA/SEPTA forum and district newsletters, to explain the budget to families ahead of the vote.

Next procedural steps: the board will receive two more detail presentations and may schedule additional work sessions before adopting a final budget and the tax levy later in the spring.